Along with incentives, good product metrics are nothing short of a cornerstone of outcome-based product support strategies.

So much so, that long-time readers will note I’ve blogged on this subject multiple times in recent years, including:

·         The Basics of Product Support (April 2016)

·         Product Support Performance Metrics (February 2013)

·         DoD Sustainment Metrics (July 2012)

·         SMART Metrics (October 2011)

·         Sustainment Outcome Metrics (March 2010)

So much so, that we’ve deployed a series of ACQuipedia articles on the subject:

·         Life Cycle Sustainment Outcome Metrics

·         Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Metrics - Overview

·         Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Metrics – Techniques & Tools for Optimizing Operating & Support (O&S) Cost & System Readiness

·         Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Metrics - Thresholds vs. Objectives

·         Incentive Contracting - Incentives, Award Fee, Award Term

·         Incentives - Motivating Achievement of Desired Product Support Outcomes

So much so, that we address the subject in several key DAU training courses and modules, including:

·         CLL 001 Life Cycle Management & Sustainment Metrics continuous learning module

·         LOG 235 Performance Based Logistics (PBL) distance learning course

·         LOG 340 Life Cycle Product Support classroom course

So much so, that in addition to DoD-level policy, the subject is extensively covered in a range of DoD and Service policy and guidance, including:

·         Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) (Appendix D, Enclosure D - Content Guide for the Sustainment KPP)

·         MIL-HDBK-260 Reference Data for Logistics Metrics

·         DoD Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Guidebook A Guide to Developing Performance-Based Arrangements (Appendix F PBL Metrics)

·         DoD Product Support Manager (PSM) Guidebook (Appendix B – Typical Supporting Performance Metrics)

·         AFPAM 63-128 Integrated Life Cycle Management (Attachment 6, Sustainment Metrics Calculations)

·         DA Pamphlet 700-127 Integrated Product Support Procedures (Appendix B Supportability Metrics for IPS Elements)

·         OPNAV Instruction 3000.12A Operational Availability of Equipment and Weapon Systems

·         DoD Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, and Cost (RAM-C) Rationale Report Manual

·         DoD Operating and Support (O&S) Cost Management Guidebook

·         Cost Assessment & Performance Evaluation (CAPE) Operating & Support (O&S) Cost-Estimating Guide

·         Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) (Chapter 5 Life Cycle Logistics)

Of course, as experienced product support managers and life cycle logisticians know well, good product support metrics are SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Timely). They are derived from, support, and align to validated warfighter requirements. They backstop and align to the Sustainment Key Performance Parameter (KPP). They measure product support efficiency, effectiveness, or both. They are linked to, facilitate, and undergird desired performance outcomes. They are, as I said earlier, a cornerstone of outcome-based product support strategies. Agree? Disagree? Thoughts? Ideas?